AliSaket

Die Hauptschwäche dieser Staffel ist m.M.n, dass die Autoren vor lauter Antagonisten vergessen haben, einen Protagonisten vorzusehen.

Interesting. May I ask where the data is from? From the picture there seem to be more demographics available.

It's funny to read back the thread. It makes it seem as if we disagree, when we clearly agree.

The overtaking rules were recently changed because of the way one driver exploited that set of rules

Yeah. But we don't know how, because they only changed the unpublished guidelines... probably. We can't really know. And you are probably correct that they want to maintain their leeway for nuance or/and manipulation, as can be witnessed nearly every season.

The kicker of this one driver's behavior last season: it's a clear breach of Appendix L Ch.4 2. b), c) and d). But all that has to happen because of that is a reporting to the Stewards. Everything beyond that is - by the rules we have access to - fully up to them. That's all I'm trying to say. The actual rules don't just offer grey areas, they lack any enforcement. It's like if the lotg say, that if the ref sees a foul, he can do as he pleases. And these problems and discussions won't cease until there are clear limits within the rules and guidelines and the public can finally see them. It doesn't mean they shouldn't allow for nuance, but this is just ridiculously arbitrary.

I agree with the overall point, yet we have to be careful not to conflate the rules with the stewarding/refereeing. You mentioned the expression grey area and I would like to point out that the football rules have been revised in the last 10 years or so, to finally shrink the scope of interpretation. There is still a lot of 'freedom' for the referees and their interpretation, but I agree, that more clear boundaries have been established. I would point to some glaring examples to the contrary, but prefer to come back to F1, which has the exact opposite situation.

The rules for football (laws of the game) are widely accessible and available including how transgressions are to be punished. In F1 on the other hand the whole thing is absolutely opaque. We can't really say, how much room for interpretation there is, because the FIA won't publish their Driving Standard Guidelines (may I present a version back from the Imola GP 2022!). So we have no real reference to measure the Stewarding against. What this year's exact wording is concerning the mirror of the overtaking car being alongside the axle of the other or whatever it is, we simply don't know. The only thing we have is the International Sporting Code (ISC), and from that Appendix L is usually the one cited in the decisions, because it handles overtaking. But: There's only a mention of a penalty points system in there, not how it is handled, nor what exactly gives someone a "right to the line" or anything in that direction.

For unsafe releases, we have ISC App. L Chapter IV 5. d) which states that "Cars must not be released from a garage or pit stop position in a way that could endanger or unnecessarily impede pit lane personnel or another driver". The penalties for breaching this rule (or anything else in the ISC) is handled somewhere else (The same goes for the Formula 1 Sporting Regulations, where the unsafe release is defined again with a few specialties to F1). In Appendix B (Stewards Penalty Guidelines) they very vaguely describe, that Stewards have the authority to enforce these rules and that they "retain the discretion (...) to tailor the penalty to the specific situation." (i.e. to judge mitigating/aggravating circumstances, etc.). Again, no clear reference to measure against. As an example for the seeming arbitrariness: In the decision document around Max' 10 second time penalty and 3 penalty points, they mention the infringement of App. L Chapter IV Article 2 d) of the ISC, but as we've seen, there isn't anything concrete in there relating to the severity of the penalty.

If we go back to Miami, Max got a 10s penalty in the Sprint for an unsafe release with a collision as a result. In their decision document the stewards write: "The Stewards acknowledge that the driver did everything he could to avoid the incident and therefore no penalty points are issued in this case." So it seems that the Stewards could theoretically issue penalty points depending on the incident at question. But again, we have no possibility to actually know. In Oliver Bearman's case in the same race, the time penalty was only 5s and there wasn't anything mentioned about any penalty points.

So regardless whether we think the rules should be penalty points for unsafe releases or not, we can't even tell how good of a job the stewards are doing, because there's a lot of uncertainty within the rules, and we don't even have access to all the relevant publications of the rules and their clarification.

consistently making mistakes no matter how minor should be getting a ban

We can find equivalents of this in other sports too. E.g. in football, when you're cautioned twice, you're sent off. And if you keep committing normal/non-cautionable foul play, you'll be cautioned. But: Just like you can't get cautioned for being off-side all the time, there's a certain level of breaching the rules in F1 as well, that leads to penalty points in the first place.

I know unsafe releases are the teams faults but its not like fines have actually reduced their occurrence

During races unsafe releases are penalized with time penalties. So there's a clear deterrent there, even if there aren't any penalty points. I'm not sure about qualifying. The fines are certainly levied during free practice sessions.

Yeah as far as I know, it's the easiest difference to spot. Also the colors as a whole aren't as vibrant, even if comparing our pictures, you couldn't tell the difference. It might be that they change looks over their lives or seasons, because I remember a female (from her calls) last year as being more brownish, than this one.

So that's where he went! 🙂 (Pic from ~ 1 week ago)

Bis morgen hat er die historische Niederlage bestimmt wieder vergessen und kann unbeschwert nach vorne blicken...

Sorry Leute. Ich finde die Tür auch alleine... im Gegensatz zu Herrn Scholz. Ok ok, ich bin dann mal weg.

Mein Punkt ist ja, dass es nicht unbedingt logisch (=präfrontaler Cortex lastig) ist, sondern im Gegenteil eher widersprüchlich. Rein spekulativ, aber das mit dem Image würde ich nicht auf Merz vs. Scholz/Habeck einschränken, sondern auf das wahrgenommene Parteiimage an sich. Den Gutmenschen und Weltverbesserern wird eine harte Gangart halt weniger abgenommen. Im Gegenteil steht Weltoffenheit halt diametral zum Drang nach Abschottung.

Der Schuss kann ferner noch weiter nach hinten losgehen, da sich die beiden Parteien von ihrer Basis entfernen und diese jeweils weniger angespornt wird, aktiv zu werden oder gar zu wählen. So etwas ähnliches sah man international am prominentesten vor ein paar Monaten in den USA. Sie ist jedoch nicht das einzige Beispiel. Die Union hingegen darf weniger Skrupel haben, da die Basis nur schon aufgrund ihrer Geschichte breit, insgesamt weiter rechts ist und durch die AfD beeinflusst wird. Die dadurch erlaubte Klarheit in der Kommunikation kann ein Vorteil sein.

Hinzu kommt die wenig ruhmreiche Regierung der Ampel, welche v.a. für Stillstand und Streit steht, als für tatsächlichen Willen und Fortschritt. Und was erreicht wurde, kam in der Öffentlichkeit auch in schlechtes Licht. Als Beispiel fällt mir spontan die unsägliche Posse um das Gebäudeenergiegesetz ein, welches in den Medien, gerade auch in den sozialen Medien, durch mit Falschinformationen durchzogenen Angriffen traktiert und nie effektvoll verteidigt und präsentiert wurde.

Neben den im Artikel genannten Gründen, scheint mir das wichtige Thema "Emotionen" etwas unterschlagen worden zu sein. Für das Beispiel Angst und Sicherheit: Die AfD hat über die letzten Jahre eine Drohkulisse aufgebaut. Natürlich unter der Komplizenschaft der Medien, welche verzerrt über Verbrechen berichten . So werden nichtdeutsche Tatverdächtige im Fernsehen 19 Mal, in Zeitungsberichten 32 Mal so häufig erwähnt, "wie es ihrem statistischen Anteil entspricht". Die Inkompetenz der anderen Parteien in Bezug auf moderne/soziale Medien gepaart mit schwer belegbaren Mis- und Desinformationkampagnen aus dem In- und Ausland runden das Ganze ab. Weiter befeuert wird die Angst durch den Angriffskrieg in der Ukraine und die Unberechenbarkeit der USA in einer zunehmend multipolaren Welt.

Die Union hat sich bezüglich dieses Themas extrem nach rechts gerückt, ohne sich den Stank des Rechtsextremismus anzueignen und steht in den Augen und eben auch Herzen vieler, für Sicherheit. Zumindest gefühlt. Zusätzlich konnte sich diese Verhindererpartei, gerade dank dieses Themas, als eine Veränderungspartei positionieren. Das sorgt auch unter Menschen, die wirtschaftlich durch die CDU Politik leiden werden für Zulauf, gerade weil der Status Quo unbefriedigend ist.

Eine Alternative, welche aus ihren eigenen Prinzipien und wertebasierten Weltanschauung heraus eine andere Erzählung und Erklärung der Ereignisse anbieten würde, steht nicht wirklich zur Wahl. Die am ehesten dafür in Frage kommende Linke befindet sich in einer organisatorischen Krise, die SPD folgte der CDU nach rechts und Bündnis 90 weiss gefühlt noch nicht so recht wohin. So gibt es nur vereinzelte Personen, welche jedoch kaum wahrgenommen werden.

Edit: Weltpolitik als Angstgrund eingefügt.

How would anything have been able to form, i.e. make more order, without decreasing entropy?

Of course there are multiple errors in that thought.

1. Entropy does not mean an actual grade of (dis-)order or organization. It's one model to grasp certain processes through that concept. Outside of these the model doesn't hold.
2. The second law of thermodynamics says that entropy cannot decrease in a CLOSED system (i.e. mass, energy, information flow at the boundary = 0). It doesn't mean that within that system there can't be local imbalances. For example: For a plant to be able to "order" - to use this term - its molecules to cells, Hydrogen atoms had to have been fused to Helium in our fusion reactor 150 million km away that we call sun which increases local entropy.

Of course there's more wrong with it, but those would be the blatant ones for me.

This is exactly what I am talking about. Do you care about democracy or not? Do you care about human rights or not? Do you care about Palestinians (Americans), African Americans, Latino Americans or all the others that are being blamed or not?

If you do, you don't just play the blame game, sit back and 'watch the world burn' as you've put it. As long as you're divided, you're powerless.

Instead of blaming, you unite. Instead of antagonizing, you organize. Instead of resignation, you fight.